--- Comment #3 from bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-05 18:56 ---
just a question. why is this illegal ?
it takes 8 values to initialize...
--bud
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25096
--- Comment #1 from bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-15 02:25 ---
i concur. it is a bug.
--
bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority: P3
Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org
GCC host triplet: i686/linux/gnu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43240
--- Comment #7 from bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-04 17:54 ---
Index: gcc/gcc/fortran/trans-decl.c
===
--- gcc/gcc/fortran/trans-decl.c(revision 155625)
+++ gcc/gcc/fortran/trans-decl.c(working copy
--- Comment #10 from bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-30 04:25 ---
let's give this a try:
Index: gcc/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/fmt_with_extra.f
===
--- gcc/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/fmt_with_extra.f (revision
--- Comment #11 from bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-30 05:23 ---
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-12/msg01200.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28039
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42267
--- Comment #1 from bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-03 19:16 ---
here is a patch against 4.4.1
diff --context --recursive gcc-4.4.1/gcc/fortran/gfortran.h
gcc-4.4.1_bud/gcc/fortran/gfortran.h
*** gcc-4.4.1/gcc/fortran/gfortran.h2009-02-21 16:25:06.0 -0600
--- gcc
--- Comment #3 from bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-03 20:21 ---
silly me. glad to see we both fixed it the same way :)
close with no more action taken ?
--bud
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42267
--- Comment #3 from bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-08-26 02:18 ---
Subject: Bug 28093
Author: bdavis
Date: Wed Aug 26 02:18:14 2009
New Revision: 151112
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=151112
Log:
2009-08-22 Bud Davis bdavis9...@sbcglobal.net
PR
--
bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot
|dot org
--- Comment #2 from bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-08-22 23:21 ---
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2009-08/msg00324.html
--
bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #4 from bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-08-23 02:27 ---
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2009-08/msg00324.html
--
bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-12 17:17 ---
i created a compilable example from the code snippet given:
INTEGER PBLJARRAYPT(341,341,1)
INTEGER NCSP0,IARRAY2,I
NCSP0 = 1
IARRAY2 = 0
DO I = 2, 341
IARRAY2 = IARRAY2 + 1
--- Comment #3 from bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-29 19:23 ---
this looks promising:
Index: gcc/gcc/fortran/simplify.c
===
--- gcc/gcc/fortran/simplify.c (revision 134801)
+++ gcc/gcc/fortran/simplify.c (working
--- Comment #5 from bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-30 00:54 ---
close. here is a better patch.
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2008-04/msg00278.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35940
--- Comment #6 from bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-30 00:55 ---
notice the 6 minutes between the above posts :)
jerry was correct, it needed a NULL check.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35940
org
ReportedBy: bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34928
ReportedBy: bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34933
--- Comment #1 from bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-23 02:51 ---
metcalf and reid, page 40 says that .neqv. is logically the same as XOR.
so, an easy work around is available.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34933
--- Comment #15 from bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-23 03:07 ---
the test cases are great...but they show too many bugs !! can't decide whether
to go for the 'grand unified solution' or just hit them one at a time :)
--bud
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id
--- Comment #4 from bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-16 23:05 ---
re-opened pending additional comments.
--
bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-14 23:13 ---
not sure i would call this one 'resolved'.
the gnat users manual does not document any such restriction:
--
In this example, expression
--- Comment #3 from bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-01 02:24 ---
in case someone does not know what a contained procedure is (i sure didn't
without getting out the Metcalf and Reid book), below is an example:
program fred
integer j
j = 0
call a(j
--- Comment #2 from bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-11-17 22:35 ---
here is what i got on a P4, running FC8.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] gfc]$ /usr/bin/gfortran -v
Using built-in specs.
Target: i386-redhat-linux
Configured with: ../configure --prefix=/usr --mandir=/usr/share/man
--infodir
--- Comment #12 from bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-20 20:56 ---
i can confirm the attached patch is wrong.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30285
--- Comment #11 from bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-20 03:41 ---
i think not. i must have confued myself (rather easy to do!). will dig
through the source this weekend.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30285
--- Comment #8 from bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-02-25 04:42 ---
the below patch looks like it fixes the problem. any chance this could be
tryed on the reported problem ?
--bud
Index: gcc/gcc/fortran/module.c
--- Comment #4 from bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-02-02 09:35 ---
from what i see so far, the problem is in the .mod files, not in the reading of
them. there are hundreds of thousands of 'commons' defined, which is silly.
any way to get source to the attached mod files ?
--bud
--- Comment #7 from bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-02-02 22:36 ---
perfect. that seems to duplicate the problem.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30285
--- Comment #3 from bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-02-02 01:50 ---
if you try the example, f951 may exit with a segfault. reason is this code
takes a lot of stack space.
for tcsh, ulimit stacksize unlimited was required.
(just to save 10 minutes for the next person who takes
--- Comment #6 from bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-15 05:10 ---
Subject: Bug 28974
Author: bdavis
Date: Wed Nov 15 05:10:22 2006
New Revision: 118844
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=118844
Log:
2006-11-15 Bud Davis [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR fortran
--- Comment #5 from bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-06 04:10 ---
patch here:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2006-11/msg00148.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28974
--- Comment #4 from bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-09-17 13:54 ---
before the patch:
$ time /usr/local/bin/gfortran -c data.f90
real3m1.263s
user3m0.519s
sys 0m0.120s
after:
$ time /usr/local/bin/gfortran -c data.f90
real0m3.215s
user0m3.052s
sys 0m0.092s
--- Comment #3 from bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-09-16 15:00 ---
more mailing list traffic on this topic:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2006-09/msg00210.html
--bud
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28974
--
bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot
|dot org
--- Comment #2 from bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-09-15 03:01 ---
This problem is very intriguing. For a first attempt I plan on adding a splay
tree to constructors that need 'by element' access. This may allow this
problem to be taken care of without changing every routine
dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29050
dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29051
dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29052
--- Comment #15 from bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-12 16:05 ---
looks like there is agreement that the problem is fixed.
--
bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot
|dot org
--- Comment #9 from bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-30 13:52 ---
after the above patch, here is a profile of the last file (that takes so long
to compile):
Each sample counts as 0.01 seconds.
% cumulative self self total
time seconds secondscalls
--- Comment #10 from bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-30 13:58 ---
with the same patch, the aermod.f90 :
Each sample counts as 0.01 seconds.
% cumulative self self total
time seconds secondscalls s/call s/call name
7.69 8.80 8.80
--- Comment #11 from bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-30 14:04 ---
if this patch gets accepted, i vote to close the PR. we are still slower than
we should be, but it is now linear and compiles in a 'reasonable time'.
--bud
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id
--- Comment #12 from bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-31 00:47 ---
Subject: Bug 21130
Author: bdavis
Date: Fri Mar 31 00:47:13 2006
New Revision: 112558
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=112558
Log:
2006-03-30 Paul Thomas [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bud Davis
--- Comment #7 from bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-29 01:47 ---
proposed patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2006-03/msg00517.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2006-03/msg00518.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21130
to be of same type
Product: gcc
Version: 4.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org
http
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26816
--- Additional Comments From bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-19
21:58 ---
patch here:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2005-02/msg00177.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20086
--- Additional Comments From bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-20
03:09 ---
proposed patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2005-02/msg00182.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19872
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: libfortran
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi
--- Additional Comments From bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-30
15:24 ---
proposed patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2005-01/msg00329.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19478
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Component|fortran |libfortran
Ever Confirmed|
--- Additional Comments From bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-21
03:15 ---
works OK on AMD-64
fails on i686
--bud
--
What|Removed |Added
Status
--- Additional Comments From bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-18
13:10 ---
patch here:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2005-01/msg00207.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19313
--- Additional Comments From bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-16
23:45 ---
added nist test to the title.
--
What|Removed |Added
Summary|blanks not treated
--- Additional Comments From bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-17
04:39 ---
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2005-01/msg00184.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19314
--- Additional Comments From bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-06
06:13 ---
patch here:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2005-01/msg00038.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18398
--- Additional Comments From bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-01
02:14 ---
re-patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2005-01/msg4.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18778
ReportedBy: bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19216
--
What|Removed |Added
Summary|formatted read with leading |list directed read with
|slash |leading slash
--- Additional Comments From bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-29
07:59 ---
closing, as all interested report it fixed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Additional Comments From bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-29
09:58 ---
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2004-12/msg00252.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18983
--- Additional Comments From bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-30
01:24 ---
this is a run time library bug.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED
--- Additional Comments From bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-24
00:14 ---
patch here
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2004-12/msg00224.html
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-24
00:29 ---
maybe fixed by pr19071, please check !!
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19064
--- Additional Comments From bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-24
03:36 ---
patch here:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2004-12/msg00228.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18778
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed||1
Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00
--- Additional Comments From bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-23
04:07 ---
i concur, it is a libgfortran bug.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17992
--- Additional Comments From bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-23
04:23 ---
after thinking about this some more, i think it is a bug in g77.
we are trying to read 3 things, the '/' which consumes the first /n, then two
numbers (each I2). the file has 2 /n's in it.
from the f77
--- Additional Comments From bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-11
01:35 ---
same results on 3.4.2
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED
--- Additional Comments From bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-09
09:41 ---
sounds reasonable to me. note that gfc_offset is either a 32 or a 63 bit value
depending on offset_t.
there is a testsuite file to test this exact problem,
unopened_unit_1.f90
! PR 14565
program
--- Additional Comments From bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-09
12:07 ---
32 or 64
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18891
--- Additional Comments From bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-08
01:38 ---
i would imagine that the number of bugs fixed in g77 / libf2c will be small, but
gcc3.4.X will be actively supported for a while.
having the bugs reported let's users know that this is a known problem
--- Additional Comments From bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-02
11:45 ---
it is really not endfile, it is endfile not creating a file if it is called on a
unit that does not yet exist.
confirmed.
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-02
11:46 ---
changed component to library
--
What|Removed |Added
Component|fortran
: libfortran
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18710
--- Additional Comments From bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-29
01:32 ---
possibly needs a front end change, as well as run-time..
c = __complex__ (1.2e+2, 2.4e+2);
_gfortran_filename = c.f;
_gfortran_line = 4;
_gfortran_ioparm.unit = 9;
_gfortran_ioparm.rec = 1B
--- Additional Comments From bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-27
15:33 ---
here's a shorter test case:
program rinput
implicit double precision(a-h,o-z)
character *8 a,b
open(unit=7)
write(7,*)'aaa123.456'
write(7,*)'bbb-123.456
--- Additional Comments From bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-27
19:31 ---
proposed patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2004-11/msg00218.html
--
What|Removed |Added
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed||1
Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00
--- Additional Comments From bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-26
14:40 ---
confirmed.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] pr18398]$ gfc z.f90
In file z.f90:27
l = bar (3)
1
Error: Symbol 'bar' at (1) has no IMPLICIT type
[EMAIL PROTECTED] pr18398]$ gfc --version
GNU Fortran 95 (GCC
--- Additional Comments From bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-24
21:42 ---
revised patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2004-11/msg00189.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18284
--- Additional Comments From bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-04 23:21
---
gfortran runtime does not know that you only intend to write to the file. you
need to add ACCESS='READ' to the open statement. With ACCESS set to read, a
read only file can be opened.
i do not think
Product: gcc
Version: 4.0.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: libfortran
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Component|fortran |libfortran
Ever Confirmed|
--- Additional Comments From bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-10-14 10:08
---
if the example is compiled with:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]$ g77 x.f -fno-automatic
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]$ ./a.out
==1st time=
first time is=:
1 1 1 0.200031 2 1 1.
2 1 1
--- Additional Comments From bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-09-28 04:12
---
proposed patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2004-09/msg00276.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17706
89 matches
Mail list logo
